Glazer: Opposed to BART strikes, backed by real estate lobby

Steve Glazer rides the rails on BART, where he wants to ban strikes. Mike Kepka/The Chronicle

Listeners to drive-time radio are hearing how Orinda City Councilman Steve Glazer, a candidate for the East Bay’s open 16th Assembly District seat, is the champion of Bay Area commuters, a brave, independent politician willing to stand up to the BART unions and their overpaid workers and challenge their right to strike. And, by the way, his unnamed opponent supported the strike efforts.

There’s no doubt Glazer, a former aide to Gov. Jerry Brown, was opposed to the strike. He was a fixture outside the Caltrans building in Oakland when BART contract negotiations were being held there last year, talking to anyone who would listen about the need to ban transit strikes in California.

It’s also true Tim Sbranti, a fellow Democrat in the Assembly race, backed the strike and the BART unions, which isn’t surprising given that he once headed a political action committee for the California Teachers Association.

But folks who listen until the end of the 30-second radio spot might have some questions about just how independent Glazer is, considering the ad was paid for by the California Association of Realtors.

The real estate industry already has pumped about $800,000 into an independent-expenditure committee for Glazer’s campaign, along with thousands in direct contributions. Other groups donating to his campaign include Bank of America, the California Restaurant Association, the Association of California Insurance Companies, Southern California Edison, Valero and Tesoro oil companies and the California Hospital Association.

Sbranti, though, can’t cast any stones. A variety of labor groups, including teachers and public employees, have put more than $1 million into their own independent expenditure committee to back the Dublin mayor, with more likely on the way. And his list of campaign contributors is a virtual “Who’s Who” of the California labor movement, along with groups like Chevron, Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and the California Medical Association, as well as Democratic Assembly members including Nancy Skinner of Berkeley, Lorena Gonzalez of San Diego, Susan Bonilla of Concord, Rob Bonta of Alameda and Alamo’s Joan Buchanan, who is termed out of the Assembly seat Sbranti and Glazer are seeking.

First, as long as there are no controls on independent expenditures, California campaign contribution limits don’t really mean much. While there’s a $4,100 maximum on what an individual can give to a candidate in a single legislative campaign, the sky’s the limit when it comes to giving to independent expenditure committees. And though it’s illegal for those independent committees to coordinate their efforts with a candidate’s campaign, voters who believe that there often isn’t at least a wink and a nod between the two groups haven’t been paying attention.

Money, as political cynics have said, will always find a way, regardless of what good government groups may wish.

In 2010, for example, it might not have been a total coincidence that when Republican Meg Whitman spent millions of her own money to trumpet her gubernatorial campaign during the typically quiet summer months, an independent expenditure committee staffed by Democratic consultants magically sprang up and spent upwards of $9 million in labor and other contributions to challenge her, only to magically disappear after Labor Day, when Brown began spending his own campaign cash.

Second, candidates — and committees — need to be careful about tossing around the “independent” label. As long as campaigns need the type of cash that only deep-pocketed donors can provide, the money will continue to flow from special interests, whether they’re teachers, real estate interests, corporate leaders or private givers. And that means it’s up to voters to decide who really is independent.